Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 22611 

years of marketing exclusivity beginning 

on the date of approval. 

The Agency has determined under 21 

CFR 25.33 that this action is of a type 

that does not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. Therefore, 

neither an environmental assessment 

nor an environmental impact statement 

is required. 

This rule does not meet the definition 

of ‘‘rule’’ in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because 

it is a rule of ‘‘particular applicability.’’ 

Therefore, it is not subject to the 

congressional review requirements in 

5 U.S.C. 801–808. 

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 522 

Animal drugs. 

Therefore, under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under 

authority delegated to the Commissioner 

of Food and Drugs and redelegated to 

the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 

CFR part 522 is amended as follows: 

PART 522—IMPLANTATION OR 

INJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEW 

ANIMAL DRUGS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR 

part 522 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b. 

■ 2. In § 522.812, revise paragraph 

(e)(2)(ii) to read as follows: 

§ 522.812 Enrofloxacin. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) Indications for use—(A) Singledose therapy: For the treatment of 

bovine respiratory disease (BRD) 

associated with Mannheimia 

haemolytica, Pasteurella multocida, 

Histophilus somni, and Mycoplasma 

bovis in beef and non-lactating dairy 

cattle. 

(B) Multiple-day therapy: For the 

treatment of bovine respiratory disease 

(BRD) associated with Mannheimia 

haemolytica, Pasteurella multocida, and 

Histophilus somni in beef and nonlactating dairy cattle. 

* * * * * 

Dated: April 15, 2011. 

Steven D. Vaughn, 

Director, Office of New Animal Drug 

Evaluation, Center for Veterinary Medicine. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9765 Filed 4–21–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 301 

[TD 9518] 

RIN 1545–BJ52 

Specified Tax Return Preparers 

Required To File Individual Income Tax 

Returns Using Magnetic Media; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Correction to final regulations. 

SUMMARY: This document describes a 

correction to final regulations (TD 9518) 

that were published in the Federal 

Register on Wednesday, March 30, 2011 

(76 FR 17521) providing guidance to 

specified tax return preparers who 

prepare and file individual income tax 

returns using magnetic media pursuant 

to section 6011(e)(3) of the Internal 

Revenue Code. 

DATES: This correction is effective on 

April 22, 2011, and is applicable to 

individual income tax returns filed after 

December 31, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Keith L. Brau, (202) 622–4940 (not a 

toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The final regulations that are the 

subject of this correction are under 

section 6011 of the Internal Revenue 

Code. 

Need for Correction 

As published, final regulations (TD 

9518) contain an error that may prove to 

be misleading and is in need of 

clarification. 

Correction of Publication 

Accordingly, the publication of the 

final regulations (TD 9518) which were 

the subject of FR Doc. 2011–7571 is 

corrected as follows: 

On page 17528, column 2, under CFR 

Part Heading ‘‘PART 301—PROCEDURE 

AND ADMINISTRATION’’, the language 

‘‘Par. 4. The authority citation for part 

301 is amended by adding an entries in 

numerical order to read, in part, as 

follows:’’ is corrected to read ‘‘Par. 4. 

The authority citation for part 301 is 

amended by adding entries in numerical 

order to read, in part, as follows:’’. 

LaNita Van Dyke, 

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, 

Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief 

Counsel (Procedure and Administration). 

[FR Doc. 2011–9737 Filed 4–21–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 311 

[Docket ID: DoD–2011–OS–0004] 

Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DoD. 

ACTION: Direct final rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary of 

Defense is exempting those records 

contained in DMDC 12 DoD, entitled 

‘‘Joint Personnel Adjudication System 

(JPAS)’’, when investigatory material is 

compiled solely for the purpose of 

determining suitability, eligibility, or 

qualifications for Federal civilian 

employment, military service, Federal 

contracts, or access to classified 

information, but only to the extent that 

such material would reveal the identity 

of a confidential source. 

This direct final rule makes 

nonsubstantive changes to the Office of 

the Secretary Privacy Program rules. 

These changes will allow the 

Department to add an exemption rule to 

the Office of the Secretary of Defense 

Privacy Program rules that will exempt 

applicable Department records and/or 

material from certain portions of the 

Privacy Act. This change will allow the 

Department to move part of the 

Department’s personnel security 

program records from the Defense 

Security Service Privacy Program to the 

Office of the Secretary of Defense 

Privacy Program. This direct final rule 

is consistent with the rule previously 

published at 32 CFR 321.13(h) and 

another rule is being published to 

remove and reserve 321.13(h). This will 

improve the efficiency and effectiveness 

of DoD’s program by preserving the 

exempt status of the applicable records 

and/or material when the purposes 

underlying the exemption(s) are valid 

and necessary. 

This rule is being published as a 

direct final rule as the Department of 

Defense does not expect to receive any 

adverse comments, and so a proposed 

rule is unnecessary. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
22612 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

DATES: The rule will be effective on July 

1, 2011 unless comments are received 

that would result in a contrary 

determination. Comments will be 

accepted on or before June 21, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and title, 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Federal Docket Management 

System Office, 1160 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–1160. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this Federal Register 

document. The general policy for 

comments and other submissions from 

members of the public is to make these 

submissions available for public 

viewing on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov as they are 

received without change, including any 

personal identifiers or contact 

information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Cindy Allard at (703) 588–6830. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Direct Final Rule and Significant 

Adverse Comments 

DoD has determined this rulemaking 

meets the criteria for a direct final rule 

because it involves nonsubstantive 

changes dealing with DoD’s 

management of its Privacy Progams. 

DoD expects no opposition to the 

changes and no significant adverse 

comments. However, if DoD receives a 

significant adverse comment, the 

Department will withdraw this direct 

final rule by publishing a notice in the 

Federal Register. A significant adverse 

comment is one that explains: (1) Why 

the direct final rule is inappropriate, 

including challenges to the rule’s 

underlying premise or approach; or 

(2) why the direct final rule will be 

ineffective or unacceptable without a 

change. In determining whether a 

comment necessitates withdrawal of 

this direct final rule, DoD will consider 

whether it warrants a substantive 

response in a notice and comment 

process. 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ and Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review’’ 

It has been determined that Privacy 

Act rules for the Department of Defense 

are not significant rules. The rules do 

not (1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more or 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy; a sector of the economy; 

productivity; competition; jobs; the 

environment; public health or safety; or 

State, local, or Tribal governments or 

communities; (2) Create a serious 

inconsistency or otherwise interfere 

with an action taken or planned by 

another Agency; (3) Materially alter the 

budgetary impact of entitlements, 

grants, user fees, or loan programs, or 

the rights and obligations of recipients 

thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy 

issues arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in these Executive orders. 

Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory 

Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6) 

It has been determined that this 

Privacy Act rule for the Department of 

Defense does not have significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because it is 

concerned only with the administration 

of Privacy Act systems of records within 

the Department of Defense. 

Public Law 95–511, ‘‘Paperwork 

Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) 

It has been determined that Privacy 

Act rules for the Department of Defense 

impose no additional information 

collection requirements on the public 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995. 

Section 202, Public Law 104–4, 

‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’ 

It has been determined that this 

Privacy Act rulemaking for the 

Department of Defense does not involve 

a Federal mandate that may result in the 

expenditure by State, local and Tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

and that such rulemaking will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ 

It has been determined that the 

Privacy Act rules for the Department of 

Defense do not have federalism 

implications. The rule does not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the 

National Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 311 

Privacy. 

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 311 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 311—OFFICE OF THE 

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND JOINT 

STAFF PRIVACY PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR 

part 311 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat. 1986 

(5 U.S.C. 522a). 

■ 2. Section 311.8 is amended by adding 

paragraph (c)(18) as follows: 

§ 311.8 Procedures for exemptions. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(18) System identifier and name: 

DMDC 12 DoD, Joint Personnel 

Adjudication System (JPAS). 

(i) Exemption: Investigatory material 

compiled solely for the purpose of 

determining suitability, eligibility, or 

qualifications for Federal civilian 

employment, military service, Federal 

contracts, or access to classified 

information may be exempt pursuant to 

5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5), but only to the 

extent that such material would reveal 

the identity of a confidential source. 

(ii) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5). 

(iii) Reasons: (A) from subsections 

(c)(3) and (d) when access to accounting 

disclosure and access to or amendment 

of records would cause the identity of 

a confidential source to be revealed. 

Disclosure of the source’s identity not 

only will result in the Department 

breaching the promise of confidentiality 

made to the source but it will impair the 

Department’s future ability to compile 

investigatory material for the purpose of 

determining suitability, eligibility, or 

qualifications for Federal civilian 

employment, Federal contracts, or 

access to classified information. Unless 

sources can be assured that a promise of 

confidentiality will be honored, they 

will be less likely to provide 

information considered essential to the 

Department in making the required 

determinations. 

(B) From subsection (e)(1) because in 

the collection of information for 

investigatory purposes, it is not always 

possible to determine the relevance and 

necessity of particular information in 

the early stages of the investigation. It is 

only after the information is evaluated 

in light of other information that its 

relevance and necessity becomes clear. 

Such information permits more 

informed decision-making by the 

Department when making required 

suitability, eligibility, and qualification 

determinations. 

* * * * * 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 22613 

Dated: April 8, 2011. 

Patricia L. Toppings, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, 

Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9745 Filed 4–21–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

32 CFR Part 311 

[Docket ID: DoD–2011–OS–0010] 

Privacy Act; Implementation 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DoD. 

ACTION: Direct final rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Office of the Secretary of 

Defense is proposing to exempt one (1) 

new system of records, DA&M 01, 

entitled, ‘‘Civil Liberties Program Case 

Management System’’ from subsections 

(c)(3); (d)(1), (2), (3), (4); (e)(1) and 

(e)(4)(G), (H), (I); and (f) of the Privacy 

Act, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k). 

This direct final rule makes 

nonsubstantive changes to the Office of 

the Secretary Privacy Program rules. 

These changes will allow the 

Department to add an exemption rule to 

the Office of the Secretary of Defense 

Privacy Program rules that will exempt 

applicable Department records and/or 

material from certain portions of the 

Privacy Act. This will improve the 

efficiency and effectiveness of DoD’s 

program by preserving the exempt status 

of the applicable records and/or 

material when the purposes underlying 

the exemption(s) are valid and 

necessary. 

This rule is being published as a 

direct final rule as the Department of 

Defense does not expect to receive any 

adverse comments, and so a proposed 

rule is unnecessary. 

DATES: The rule will be effective on July 

1, 2011 unless comments are received 

that would result in a contrary 

determination. Comments will be 

accepted on or before June 21, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and title, 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Federal Docket Management 

System Office, Room 3C843, 1160 

Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20301–1160. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this Federal Register 

document. The general policy for 

comments and other submissions from 

members of the public is to make these 

submissions available for public 

viewing on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov as they are 

received without change, including any 

personal identifiers or contact 

information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Cindy Allard at (703) 588–6830. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Direct Final Rule and Significant 

Adverse Comments 

DoD has determined this rulemaking 

meets the criteria for a direct final rule 

because it involves nonsubstantive 

changes dealing with DoD’s 

management of its Privacy Progams. 

DoD expects no opposition to the 

changes and no significant adverse 

comments. However, if DoD receives a 

significant adverse comment, the 

Department will withdraw this direct 

final rule by publishing a notice in the 

Federal Register. A significant adverse 

comment is one that explains: (1) Why 

the direct final rule is inappropriate, 

including challenges to the rule’s 

underlying premise or approach; or (2) 

why the direct final rule will be 

ineffective or unacceptable without a 

change. In determining whether a 

comment necessitates withdrawal of 

this direct final rule, DoD will consider 

whether it warrants a substantive 

response in a notice and comment 

process. 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ and Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review’’ 

It has been determined that Privacy 

Act rules for the Department of Defense 

are not significant rules. The rules do 

not (1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more or 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy; a sector of the economy; 

productivity; competition; jobs; the 

environment; public health or safety; or 

State, local, or Tribal governments or 

communities; (2) Create a serious 

inconsistency or otherwise interfere 

with an action taken or planned by 

another Agency; (3) Materially alter the 

budgetary impact of entitlements, 

grants, user fees, or loan programs, or 

the rights and obligations of recipients 

thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy 

issues arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in these Executive orders. 

Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory 

Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6) 

It has been determined that this 

Privacy Act rule for the Department of 

Defense does not have significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because it is 

concerned only with the administration 

of Privacy Act systems of records within 

the Department of Defense. 

Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork 

Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) 

It has been determined that Privacy 

Act rules for the Department of Defense 

impose no additional information 

collection requirements on the public 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995. 

Section 202, Public Law 104–4, 

‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995’’ 

It has been determined that this 

Privacy Act rulemaking for the 

Department of Defense does not involve 

a Federal mandate that may result in the 

expenditure by State, local and Tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

and that such rulemaking will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’ 

It has been determined that the 

Privacy Act rules for the Department of 

Defense do not have federalism 

implications. The rule does not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the 

National Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 311 

Privacy. 

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 311 is 

amended as follows: 

PART 311—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR 

part 311 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat. 1986 

(5 U.S.C. 522a). 

■ 2. Section 311.8 is amended by adding 

paragraph (c)(19) as follows: 

§ 311.8 Procedures for exemptions. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(19) System identifier and name: 

DA&M 01, Civil Liberties Program Case 

Management System. 

(i) Exemptions: Records contained in 

this System of Records may be 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES